Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Mixable reality, Collaboration, and Evaluation (S36: User Experience Design in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage)

362 views

Published on

How to avoid one hit AR wonders?
scalable yet engaging content
appropriate evaluation research
stable tools, long-term robust infrastructure essential
Non-technical constraint: VR and AR/MR preconceptions.
WebVR and WebXR formats
Two projects
CMR: two HoloLens HMDs
CVR: 2 people, 2 devices share + control 1 character

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Mixable reality, Collaboration, and Evaluation (S36: User Experience Design in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage)

  1. 1. Mixablereality,Collaboration,andEvaluation (S36:UserExperienceDesigninArchaeologyandCulturalHeritage) Erik Champion, UNESCO Chair, Cultural Heritage & Visualisation MCASI, Curtin Institute of Computation, Curtin University, Perth Australia @nzerik erik.champion@curtin.edu.au
  2. 2. Abstract How to avoid one hit AR wonders?  scalable yet engaging content  appropriate evaluation research  stable tools, long-term robust infrastructure essential  Non-technical constraint: VR and AR/MR preconceptions.  WebVR and WebXR formats  Two projects  CMR: two HoloLens HMDs  CVR: 2 people, 2 devices share + control 1 character
  3. 3. session themes toconsider  Critical thinking/reflection in design  Experimental spaces 1. UX ‘success’ in archaeology/heritage? ‘Failure’? 2. Developing UX / UIs-moving past single narrative and cultural presence approaches. 3. Unconscious choices in my design processes. 4. Clarification of values, mission, objectives and aims https://theconversation.com/virtual-reality-adds-to-tourism-through- touch-smell-and-real-peoples-experiences-101528 VR for therapy: scale, process
  4. 4. Criticalthinking- wellIwroteabook onit
  5. 5. ExperimentalSpaces
  6. 6. PhD 2001-4
  7. 7. VR cannot match real thing?? … the emotions you feel when you have a virtual experience are not as valuable. When you actually see Niagara Falls, especially if you get up close, you feel awe and even fear in the face of an overpowering force of nature… Computer simulations, however good, contain only what photography, laser technology and pre-existing expertise put into them… Real experiences connect us to the deeds of past people and place us in contexts where history was made… VR will never be a substitute for encounters with the real thing. Janna Thompson, Professor of Philosophy, La Trobe University https://theconversation.com/why- virtual-reality-cannot-match-the-real-thing-92035 Sir David Attenborough re: Natural History Museum’s “Hold the World” VR, provides a richer understanding of process, people can move and
  8. 8. Figure 2 User-Reality-Virtuality (URV) Interaction: Interaction between users, display technologies and the real world. Mafkereseb Bekele A Survey of Augmented, Virtual, and Mixed Reality for Cultural Heritage CulturalPresence?
  9. 9. https://alisonjamesart.com/2017/03/12/what-is-a-virtuality/ Milgram Takemura Utsumi & Kishino (1994)
  10. 10. AR: “Layered” (L) AR: “Embedded” (L)
  11. 11. Mixed reality https://medium.com/@marknb00/what-is-mixed-reality-60e5cc284330
  12. 12. 3 promising trends 1. VR equipment is moving towards a consumer- component based system. 2. Smartphone = stereoscopic viewers & PCs (Samsung Gear). 3. Consumer technology frameworks will help improve access.. WebXR or OpenXR in browser
  13. 13. Phone-based VR
  14. 14. Seated/standingVR
  15. 15. Walkable VR
  16. 16. Where, whom, why, how and what is learnt  What is the goal? Why try to reach it?  An engaging challenge? Involves competition/mastery, chance, imitation, controlling vertigo/rush of movement/flight?  Feedback system? Affordances, constraints; rewards, punishments?  Levels up/advance via mechanics?  Does it offer different strategies?  What is learnt during or after the experience?
  17. 17. Duyfken, Mafkereseb Bekele
  18. 18. SS Xantho Steam Engine, Mafkereseb Bekele
  19. 19. Mafkereseb Bekele
  20. 20. Intern project Agathe Limouzy Toulouse (Collaborative Learning)
  21. 21. Summary VR not just ”reality” interaction, User Exp. crucial to VR/AR Collaborative learning in MR: promising but how to evaluate? Cultural Presence difficult… social presence easier Few PhD projects on contested heritage via communities Erik Champion erik.champion@curtin.edu.au #nzerik
  22. 22. Erik Champion, Curtin University @nzerik erik.champion@curtin.edu.au

×